Jump to content
Starbuck

Adobe plug-ins detect "shopped" pictures

Recommended Posts

Cool!

 

Great news for Photo competitions and magazine editors.

 

Alex

 

p.s. And great news for photographers who know how to use our cameras!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is really a great tool and it was time to come.. will help much in some categories of Photography-

 

For the fashion & model is this not usefull att all becauce the most photos are cloned and strong retushed

not eather think as Alex.. that this will be a tool that will show wich one photografer can use the camera.. i know guys that are in both ways gurus and create exeptional photos.

 

But this is a other topic .. becauce the term"manipulation" off a image is very elastic....

Is can beginn for some with just Levels and contrast, others se it more as hard retusch & lens distrotion, some think filters are to a manipulation. I think the final photo is the only that matters and how its have be done , wich old lab or new photoshop way is not relevant. they are just tools in the same way Magic filter is a tool ;-)

 

In freediving photos that i shoot is just color corection levels that i change. In model photos is offen that i must retuch the face off the model or just take away the background off a ugly pool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well a lot of contest entrants who are PS experts but so so photographers may be trembling in their contest entering boots. I have said in several past posts that I have never seen competitions take a turn with winners' names and so forth like I have with the advent of digital. Perfect black backgrounds, vibrant colors, clean images with no gorgonian poking in from the side, etc. IN the old days these were the winning pictures. It's not that skills are better it the median in which the pictures are taken. "IF" competitions decide to use these tools, I would guess that 90 percent of all entrants will be disqualified. A simple crop, a clone out of backscatter will indicate a fraud (unless it's in their rules.) But you can replace a scattered background with a perfectly black one so if the software says, "something was added" you are sunk. I've never entered a competition with anything more than cropped images and some scatter removal (and I also dont know how to do all of that fancy PS work), but I can see a lot of winning names changing if contest manages use this type of tool. And I don't think that is a bad thing. Mark my words. We will probably see a huge spike in the print categories. :ninja::(:rolleyes:

 

Joe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure capabilities similar to what people are imagining will eventually be realized, someday, but it may not be as soon as some think. If you read the C-Net report carefully, they're talking about two tools that are "at a fairly advanced stage of development."

 

One of the tools can detect "missing pixels" - i.e., cropping. Cropping isn't even illegal in most photo contests that I'm aware of, nor (in my view) should it be.

 

The other tool can detect two or more patches of pixels that are "improbably similar" and thus likely to be clones of each other or another part of some image. This could be used to detect use of the clone tool to remove backscatter, for instance (something I've never regarded as a crime) as well as much more serious modifications, for example, the replication of smoke in the famous fraudulent Reuters news photograph from Iraq last year. But the cloning in that image was obvious to the naked eye to anyone who has ever worked with Photoshop. And it sounds like it would be trivial to evade detection by this tool, if one wanted to. For example, it would probably not catch removal of backscatter that had been accomplished with the healing tool instead of the clone tool.

 

The Dartmouth professor cited in the report has apparently made more sophisticated programs than the tools described here available to law enforcement agencies, and it's apparently a trivial matter to determine the type of camera used to generate a image, or whether the image has ever been touched by photoshop at all. (If the photo contests wanted to achieve that, they could just require that all images be submitted as raw image files out of the camera.

 

Of course, some of us wouldn't be too happy having some judge or panel (or their software defaults) else decide what white balance and tone curve should be used when my raw image file is converted for viewing. But anyone who is hung up enough to want to disqualify a photo because a few dots of backscatter were removed probably won't mind.

For me, this whole discussion just supplies more reasons not to get involved in photo competitions. It should be about the images, right?

Edited by frogfish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never enter photo competitions - because I might not win. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always enter the competitions because my mom :rolleyes: told me I'm an excellent photographer :ninja:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only do "splash in" photo competitions (sealed cameras, jpegs right from the memory card to Jury) B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...